Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37815663›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2023

Contributing and limiting factors to guideline-adherent therapy in senior and elderly breast cancer patients: a questionnaire-based cross-sectional study using clinical and cancer registry data in Germany.

Andreas Heidenreich, Rabea Fuchshofen, Susanne Elsner, Frank Gieseler, Alexander Katalinic, Joachim Hübner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Treatment decision-making for patients with cancer aged 75 and older: perspectives from focus group interviews with patients, family caregivers, and healthcare providers.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andreas HeidenreichInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23560, Luebeck, Germany. andreas.heidenreich@uksh.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3279-416X
Rabea FuchshofenInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23560, Luebeck, Germany.
Susanne ElsnerInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23560, Luebeck, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7678-7071
Frank GieselerClinic for Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Luebeck, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6409-3822
Alexander KatalinicInstitute of Social Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23560, Luebeck, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0490-1554
Joachim HübnerAgency for Clinical Cancer Data of Lower Saxony, Oldenburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8596-2046

Funding

German Federal Joint Committee 01VSF16035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeElderly cancer patients are less likely to be treated in accordance with evidence-based guideline recommendations. This study examines patient-related factors associated with deviations from guideline recommendations.

methodsUsing medical documentation and cancer registry data, we investigated the treatment courses of female breast cancer patients aged 50 and older in Germany regarding compliance with German guidelines. Participants completed a questionnaire querying factors hypothesized to be associated with guideline adherence. We conducted univariate analyses to explore the data and select variables for multivariate logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios.

resultsOf 1150 participants, 206 (17.9%) were treated in deviation from guideline recommendations. Patients 70 years and older were more likely to be treated deviating from guideline recommendations than patients 50-69 years old (OR: 2.07; 95% CI: 1.52-2.80). Patients aged 50-69 years who reported that quality of life guided their treatment decision were more likely to be treated in deviation from guideline recommendations (AOR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.11-3.92) than the elderly. In older patients, higher age was associated with an increased chance of receiving guideline-discordant care (AOR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.01-1.11), as was depression diagnosed prior to cancer (AOR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.00-3.40).

conclusionReasons for deviations from guideline recommendations in breast cancer patients differ by age. In decision-making concerning elderly patients, particular attention should be paid to those with pre-existing depressive disorders. Adequately addressing their needs and concerns could prevent inappropriate deviations from guideline recommendations.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansMiddle AgedQuality of LifeRoutinely Collected Health DataSurveys and QuestionnairesBreast cancerGuidelinesPatient needsPatient preferences

Identifiers

PMID37815663
PMCPMC10657281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.